Would you date a divorced (or almost divorced) person?

[pianistclare]

Which begs the question: Why aren’t there any singles ministries or apostolates in most dioceses? You don’t see single Mormons or Evangelicals complaining they can’t find spouses: their churches aren’t indifferent to their discernment. I sooooo wish I could have converted to LDS for the guarantee of a wife.

Our does.

 

[jmcrae]

Assuming they were the innocent party, yes.

What is meant by the phrase “innocent party”?

If they were not the one seeking a sexual relationship outside the bounds of their marriage, then why are they dating you?

 

[pianistclare]

What is meant by the phrase “innocent party”?

If they were not the one seeking a sexual relationship outside the bounds of their marriage, then why are they doing dating you?

 

[steve93]

What is meant by the phrase “innocent party”?

If they were not the one seeking a sexual relationship outside the bounds of their marriage, then why are they dating you?

If their former spouse has committed a legitimate grievance, abuse, adultery, apostacy, etc.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

What is meant by the phrase “innocent party”?

If they were not the one seeking a sexual relationship outside the bounds of their marriage, then why are they dating you?

Steve is Orthodox and I know the Orthodox do allow for divorce in some cases.

Even among Catholics there is a sentiment that if someone does not want to divorce but is unilaterally abandoned, or divorce in order to protect themselves, then it is somehow “unfair” to the “innocent party” to “punish” them by not allowing them a chance at a happy second marriage.

And while I realize there is no difference regarding nullity or not of the first marriage, I certainly have more sympathy for, say, someone who did not want divorce, but had no choice but to divorce due to no-fault divorce laws, and has been civilly divorced for years and didn’t even pursue annulment but winds up meeting someone special, than those who jump into the dating world with the divorce yet to even be finalized civilly, with no effort at all to save the marriage.

Not to mention those who start dating even before filing for divorce, though as I mentioned before many such people don’t even plan on divorcing at all, but claim they are to prospective lovers.

 

[steve93]

If their former spouse has committed a legitimate grievance, abuse, adultery, apostacy, etc.

I’m not presently dating anyone. I was discussing a hypothetical. After all, doesn’t the bible forbid punishing someone for someone else’s sin?
The Russians would not allow divorce just because of “incompatibility”. One spouse would have had to commit some significant evil against the other. Abuse is evil. Adultery is evil. Exiting from the church and joining islam is, basically, tantamount to declaring intent to do evil if you read what their perverse idea of “marriage” is.

 

[Della]

I’m not presently dating anyone. I was discussing a hypothetical. After all, doesn’t the bible forbid punishing someone for someone else’s sin?
The Russians would not allow divorce just because of “incompatibility”. One spouse would have had to commit some significant evil against the other. Abuse is evil. Adultery is evil. Exiting from the church and joining islam is, basically, tantamount to declaring intent to do evil if you read what their perverse idea of “marriage” is.

But, marriage vows say: “In sickness and in health, for better or for worse,” not “only if s/he remains faithful, doesn’t beat me, treats me fairly,” etc. Of course, no one is expected to live with an abusive person or one who will not be faithful. That decision is between the one being abused, etc. and his/her priest. Living apart might be required, if no civil divorce is wanted or possible. Divorce needs to be the very last option, not the first thing people decide to do.

Annulments are declared for spouses who entered into the marriage who had prior indication(s) they had no intentions of being faithful/wouldn’t remain faithful after marriage, who wouldn’t be open to having children, who had serious issues they didn’t divulge beforehand, etc. IOW, the reason for an annulment is that one or both parties didn’t intend to marry according to the Church’s definition/intentions. They’re attempt at marriage didn’t produce a marriage. This only deals with Church law, not civil law, so it doesn’t affect the legitimacy of children.

All this should be made clear to engaged couples, which is why the Cana preparation classes were started. Marriage is indissoluble. An annulment is not a dissolution of a marriage it is a declaration that no marriage ever took place.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Maybe it’s because of my age, but if I were single, the answer would be a firm ‘no’. I’ve met a few divorcees in my age group, and frankly, I’m always unimpressed. If you’ve managed to get married, have it fall apart, and get a divorce by your late 20’s or even early 30’s, that’s a chorus of alarm bells.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Which begs the question: Why aren’t there any singles ministries or apostolates in most dioceses? You don’t see single Mormons or Evangelicals complaining they can’t find spouses: their churches aren’t indifferent to their discernment. I sooooo wish I could have converted to LDS for the guarantee of a wife.

1. A wife is far from guaranteed. Also, if anyone ever tells you they can guarantee a wife, you should probably report them for human trafficking. (See Pew link on LDS marriage below)
2. While their marriage rates are higher, having a strong marriage and children is a part of their overall culture that leads to things like young singles groups. It isn’t that the church is just giving women away.
3. The church will recommend or endorse specific people for marriage. But, young men have to really prove themselves via a self-funded mission trip, regular service to the church, extreme obedience to church leadership, etc to get that kind of favor.
4. Uh…you’d have to be a Mormon, and that wife of yours would actually be a Mormon too.

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/22/mormons-more-likely-to-marry-have-more-children-than-other-u-s-religious-groups/

Seriously, if you want to be married, be proactive and stop bemoaning that your congregation won’t build your family for you.

 

[jaimeleglise]

I would never date or marry a divorced person because Jesus calls it adultery in the Gospels. It is more than a Church law, it is a divine law. Once two people are validly married, they are married for life.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I wouldn’t unless I wanted to cause myself or another person heartache. If we fell in love marriage wouldn’t be an option unless an annulment was granted.

 

[pianistclare]

maybe it’s because of my age, but if i were single, the answer would be a firm ‘no’. I’ve met a few divorcees in my age group, and frankly, i’m always unimpressed. If you’ve managed to get married, have it fall apart, and get a divorce by your late 20’s or even early 30’s, that’s a chorus of alarm bells.

exactly.

 

[Xantippe]

1. A wife is far from guaranteed. Also, if anyone ever tells you they can guarantee a wife, you should probably report them for human trafficking. (See Pew link on LDS marriage below)
2. While their marriage rates are higher, having a strong marriage and children is a part of their overall culture that leads to things like young singles groups. It isn’t that the church is just giving women away.
3. The church will recommend or endorse specific people for marriage. ** But, young men have to really prove themselves via a self-funded mission trip, regular service to the church, extreme obedience to church leadership, etc to get that kind of favor.
   **
4. Uh…you’d have to be a Mormon, and that wife of yours would actually be a Mormon too.

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/22/mormons-more-likely-to-marry-have-more-children-than-other-u-s-religious-groups/

Seriously, if you want to be married, be proactive and stop bemoaning that your congregation won’t build your family for you.

Hilarious!

 

[WilliamE]

My wife married a divorced non-Catholic.

Best thing that ever happened to me.

 

[holyrood]

if I were single, the answer would be a firm ‘no’. I’ve met a few divorcees in my age group, and frankly, I’m always unimpressed. If you’ve managed to get married, have it fall apart, and get a divorce by your late 20’s or even early 30’s, that’s a chorus of alarm bells.

I find this a particularly sad comment coming from someone who has long been on here pushing the ‘open-minded’ and ‘accepting’ position with regards to homosexuality and other liberal issues. Yet someone who is divorced is going to be judged.

[Given that you’re married, I’m curious why you are even thinking about divorced people and whether you’re ‘impressed’ with them or not–it’s not like you’re considering them for a relationship or marriage.]

To an extent, I actually share your opinion. If someone is married and divorced before 30, *it’s fair to ask why] before embarking on a relationshiop. * And yet…what a judgmental, blanket statement. What if a good person is divorced because…their spouse announced they’re gay and have been since before marriage? Their spouse was cheating on them from before marriage until caught? Their spouse has a drug or alcohol addiction, is cheating, turns out to have a wife already, said they wanted children while in truth they didn’t or even had permanent sterilization already?

I am divorced–and the marriage is annulled by the Catholic Church, whose tribunal has reviewed all the evidence and found it to have been an invalid marriage. I filed after realizing he was cheating and quite likely had been even before and immediately after marriage. I filed because it was the only legal protection to finances in a community property state–and by that, I mean the very ability to pay mortgage, to keep a roof over my children’s heads, when I found he was not only dragging us deep into debt (lying to me and hiding credit cards) but also actively stealing–yes, stealing–what I had managed to put aside in my own personal account as a buffer to pay our bills. *

We must be discerning. But we must also be wary of pre-judging an entire group of people.

Those who give a blanket NO may be passing up true gems.*

 

[fin]

True. I’ve heard a priest said on the radio that if one is separated (not annulled), one isn’t free to date or to consider a potential romantic relationship, because one is already married.

I would never date or marry a divorced person because Jesus calls it adultery in the Gospels. It is more than a Church law, it is a divine law. Once two people are validly married, they are married for life.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I find this a particularly sad comment coming from someone who has long been on here pushing the ‘open-minded’ and ‘accepting’ position with regards to homosexuality and other liberal issues. Yet someone who is divorced is going to be judged.

[Given that you’re married, I’m curious why you are even thinking about divorced people and whether you’re ‘impressed’ with them or not–it’s not like you’re considering them for a relationship or marriage.]

To an extent, I actually share your opinion. If someone is married and divorced before 30, it’s fair to ask why] before embarking on a relationshiop. And yet…what a judgmental, blanket statement. What if a good person is divorced because…their spouse announced they’re gay and have been since before marriage? Their spouse was cheating on them from before marriage until caught? Their spouse has a drug or alcohol addiction, is cheating, turns out to have a wife already, said they wanted children while in truth they didn’t or even had permanent sterilization already?

I am divorced–and the marriage is annulled by the Catholic Church, whose tribunal has reviewed all the evidence and found it to have been an invalid marriage. I filed after realizing he was cheating and quite likely had been even before and immediately after marriage. I filed because it was the only legal protection to finances in a community property state–and by that, I mean the very ability to pay mortgage, to keep a roof over my children’s heads, when I found he was not only dragging us deep into debt (lying to me and hiding credit cards) but also actively stealing–yes, stealing–what I had managed to put aside in my own personal account as a buffer to pay our bills. *

We must be discerning. But we must also be wary of pre-judging an entire group of people.

Those who give a blanket NO may be passing up true gems.*

I’m not sure what this has to do with homosexuality; I feel the same towards broken marriages regardless of the gender of the people in them.

I’m sympathetic to the scenarios you provided. Heck, when I was young, probably too young to be engaged, my then fiance came out as gay. The enormous sense of shame and failure I felt as I told everyone the engagement was off was crushing.

But, that doesn’t mean that if I were single at this stage of my life, I would want to be involved with a divorcee. I wouldn’t want to be someone’s second attempt at building a family, and certainly not in the short amount of time we’re talking about here - getting married, divorced, and starting a new relationship all before you’re 30 doesn’t really leave a lot of time for self-reflection or figuring out what went wrong, even for the innocent party. If I were in my 40’s, it would be different, if for no other reason than by that point all single people are divorced and everyone has had more time to learn a few life lessons.

 

[adamhovey1988]

I was inspired to post this by a recent Popular Media topic about a NYT article gushing over the recent marriage of 2 people, yet glossing over the fact that when they “fell in love” they were married to other people.

Now, certainly I know the party line is “no, until/unless there is an annulment, dating a divorced person is adultery”, that is the reply I’d get if I posted this in Moral Theology.

But it seems that in practice, most Catholics find it perfectly legitimate to date a divorced person, and most Catholics who apply for annulment already have a prospective spouse in mind, sometimes they are already engaged. I’ve even read posters on CAF state that “there is no reason to apply for annulment unless you want to remarry” and the posts make it obvious they don’t mean “unless you want to remarry someday in the future” but “unless you find someone who makes you want to remarry”.

In the secular world, it seems people make no distinction at all between “divorced” and “about to be divorced”, they don’t consider it to be adultery at all to date someone who is technically married but won’t be much longer. Some even don’t find it adultery to date someone who is legally separated, even if that person might not be committed to ending the marriage.

Then of course there are those who claim “I’m getting divorced” but aren’t actually planning on leaving their spouses, they just use that as a way to seduce people who might otherwise not want to be “the other man” or “other woman”.

Anyway, all this being said, would you personally find it acceptable to date a divorced or separated person if there was no chance at all the first marriage would recover. Do you think this would only be adultery if you had sex? Or, what if you were convinced the first marriage is invalid (or are just cynically assuming the Tribunal will grant the annulment as a matter of course)?

ETA: And regarding cheaters who lie about getting divorced, I can think of a true-crime case about a man who was cheating on his wife, who killed her. Sadly not that uncommon in the true crime genre, but the answer to the question that often comes up of “why didn’t he just get a divorce”, had a twist, a very twisted one at that.

See, he’d lied to his mistress that not only was he getting divorced, he wasn’t even having sex with his wife anymore – only to have the wife get pregnant. Oops. Afraid to lose the mistress if she found he was “cheating” on her, he chose to murder his wife, (and unborn child), before the pregnancy became public. The mistress herself was cleared of involvement in the murder. But it’s ironic that she’d be angry at her lover for “cheating” on her with his own wife.

I think to answer your question it depends. My former French Professor is divorced and I have a crush on her and she is aware of this. I think people tend to forget the point of dating is to end up in marriage and if the Church tells me that I can’t marry someone because of their divorce than I’m obligated to obey the Church. I think that’s the problem with our culture we keep telling ourselves to listen to our heart but I know my Bible well enough to know that the heart is deceitful above all things. Fortunately for me the woman I’m interested in at this moment has never been married unfortunately though she is Protestant now I don’t have a problem with Catholics marrying Protestants. The problem is but sometimes it’s hard to do because you’re technically supposed to have permission from your Bishop. In the part of the United States where I live, there are a lot more Protestants so I don’t see that being a problem. I think like I said before depends on the reason for divorce a lot of times people who get divorced get married quite young and don’t have the mental capacity to understand that marriage is supposed to be permanent which the Church would rule invalid.

 

[St_Pancake]

I think to answer your question it depends. My former French Professor is divorced and I have a crush on her and she is aware of this. I think people tend to forget the point of dating is to end up in marriage and if the Church tells me that I can’t marry someone because of their divorce than I’m obligated to obey the Church. I think that’s the problem with our culture we keep telling ourselves to listen to our heart but I know my Bible well enough to know that the heart is deceitful above all things. Fortunately for me the woman I’m interested in at this moment has never been married unfortunately though she is Protestant now I don’t have a problem with Catholics marrying Protestants. The problem is but sometimes it’s hard to do because you’re technically supposed to have permission from your Bishop. In the part of the United States where I live, there are a lot more Protestants so I don’t see that being a problem. I think like I said before depends on the reason for divorce a lot of times people who get divorced get married quite young and don’t have the mental capacity to understand that marriage is supposed to be permanent which the Church would rule invalid.

Would you date a divorced protestant? They would have no reason to have their marriage annulled, so, would you?

 

[St_Pancake]

What is meant by the phrase “innocent party”?

If they were not the one seeking a sexual relationship outside the bounds of their marriage, then why are they dating you?

Do you not think two people can go out and have dinner without it being sin?